- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:51:08 +0100
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, www-international@w3.org
Bert Bos wrote: > and we probably don't need 'lower-armenian' and 'upper-armenian' at all, > just 'armenian'. Based on the findings exposed in my recent email to CSS WG, I seriously wonder if we need 'armenian' at all... > Lowercase for numbers must be very rare. He has only ever seen uppercase. They're not rare at all. Please see below. ---- begin quote I have pinged an armenian expert in France, she's also an appointed translator between armenian and french in french courts. Here's her take about traditional armenian numbering: - lists are very rarely numbered in traditional armenian numbering, even old editions of the Bible use roman numbers for lists. It's, according to her, unlikely that anyone on the web will use armenian numbering for numbered lists. In her whole professionnal life, she has never translated an armenian document using traditional numbering for lists. - case of numbers in armenian follows the position in the sentence. The 1st glyph of a number being at the start of a sentence will be uppercase, just like in a normal word. All other 'digits' will remain lowercase. Numbers in a middle of a sentence are lowercase. A second source, armenian bookstore in paris, also told me that newspapers that used traditional armenian numbering for lists have dropped it and now use almost exclusively arabic or roman numbers. Newspapers have sporadically used traditional numbering during the soviet era to mark cultural independance only. (the newspaper I have is from 1981). So I guess the result is "go for uppercase since it does not really matter, armenian numbered lists don't appear to use traditional numbering at all these days". ----end quote </Daniel>
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 07:51:58 UTC